New bushcraft magazine issues legal warning...

[spoony]

Maybe, just maybe somewhere in that evidently hastily typed diatribe you have some point. If it was *just* a complaint about some magazine allegedly spamming people from this site.

If it helps, here is a link to the email from the magazine that somebody received. And here is a response that said the address didn't arrive like that.

If, on the other hand, it was a complaint that someone who had made an apology, then gave some allegedly untruthful responses to questions, and then resorted to legal threats because he didn't like being picked up - you don't have a point.

I know which I think.

Yeah and......mountain....molehill spring to mind, its only gone that far because of all the whinging...this could have all been just quietly swept away, i could say what I THINK the real issue is but i wont. This is just my simple view,

 

[spoony]

SPAM is irritating but not the end of the world. We all use the Web and we
do what we can to avoid such things as SPAM.

The Mag editor/owner shouldn't have spat his dummy out when a few people
complained about underhand practises relating to his mag.

But do you haveproof it was him?? and wouldnt you if someone were slagging off your business??

Either he is genuinely innocent of what has happened or he has been
sneaky about things and been found out. His 'business' instinct is to
go on the offensive first and worry about customer care last.

Either way, for me it's bad practise and I'm sick of receiving poor service. As
though the seller is doing me a favour. If people want my money, I expect
them to be professional.

This is a magazine that wants all the money upfront. If it folds after a few
issues, are they going to offer refunds or is there yet something else in
their cryptographic Terms and Conditions that will allow them to unleash
their pack of legal wolfhounds into keeping holding of people's cash.

If he had any sense, he would start grovelling now and not stop for a year.

Customer always right Bushcraft Mag? Yes they are if you want their money!!!

But you have to remember if you dont want to buy the mag then dont, nobody is forcing anybody, some will like to see it take off and support it by buying the mag, others just want to see it fail.

 

[Lifthasir]

There are two kinds of people in the world:

Those that say what they think and those that think what they (should) say.

By commenting on the line, you are keeping it going.

Not related to Bushcraft Mag's owner/editor/lawyer general factotum
are you Spoony?

 

[bothyman]

Personnally i think you all need to get a life, cant really believe how long and far you have all dragged this out, for gods sake so some of you got a email, big deal, just click delete, problem solved, oh no now that would be too easy. I know lets all jump on the band wagon, slate the mag across 2 forums. Did the guy from the mag not post to explain his side??? if so where is it??? hmmmm

Come on sort your selves out, im sure there are more important things to sort out than a email you didnt want.

I mean i got an email from Trail mag the other day, cant remember subscribing to get them. What should i do, read it because i enjoy that kind of thing?? delete it as i dont like spam?? oh i know start a thread slating the mag and never buy it again

Well said Spoony.

I contacted the Magazine and asked about single issues as I would like to have a look at it.
But I did not receive any of this so called spam.
If I had I would have been happy with it as Bushcraft is one of my interests and would have felt it was sent in good faith because of that interest.

I presume this is the first time all the people who are complaining have received spam??
Don't worry, I usually get some sort of spam everyday you just learn to live with it, delete it, and move on.




MickT

 

[bushtuckerman]

tracking "Cookies"

The knowledge and generosity of the posters on this site proves that a lot can be learnt through cooperation, shared learning and enthusiasm.

what happens if you post some amazing discovery on here and it mysteriously appears in a magazine. What recourse do you have?

Hmm, well it's a bit like open source software isnt it, it excels in innovative ideas since it is based on the idea of sharing...software such as firefox. I don't know about cookies so much, but i read something geeky somewhere that said if you use explorer then those temporary files that you 'delete' are merely stored on the hard drive within miles of unexplored code... Use firefox however and this doesn't happen, it also has loads of anti-annoyware and cookie controls if you decide to download the various plugins available (far more than are available for explorer). I'm not marketing it, it's free!

well i guess the recourse is that they shoot themselves in the foot if their prime market is obliterated by their approach. personally i can't see the problem with complaining about it, if they think straight then it helps them to suit their customers, and therefore become trusted, which equals long term investment...Also, we believe in free speech in this country, and that is because it encourages fairness and openness. Tony has to make his own rules for the forum, but i think we know that he encourages fair comments, not unfair ones.

I've already made my point about commercial magazines, and perhaps it's not very agreeable, but it stems from the same reasons behind my stance in this post: sharing information is more productive.

 

[Lurch]

i could say what I THINK the real issue is but i wont. This is just my simple view,

If what you think the "real issue" is, is what I think you think it is (everyone following?) then I think you are way off beam.

 

[bushtuckerman]

the thing is, the delete key can be a bit of a smokescreen, not to scaremonger or anything...

 

[spoony]

If what you think the "real issue" is, is what I think you think it is (everyone following?) then I think you are way off beam.

you havent got a clue what i think, but i know you think you do by your post, and the everyone following bit, whats that about?? if not trying to egg folk on and stir the sh**,??? dont get personal.

 

[bushtuckerman]

I think spoony is referring to a conflict of interest between magazines? but i could well be wrong.

 

[scanker]

This is getting a bit cryptic isn't it. I haven't had any spam. What's wrong with my email account?

I get loads of spam. That's what my filter's for. I've had the same email address for years and I have several domains in my name with my email as the contact, so it gets spammed on a regular basis. It all just gets deleted with a click. Anyway, that's by and by.

I think it has been thrown a bit out of proportion, but the reason for it is because instead of a (IMO) reasonable response, such as hands up, apology, have an X% discount on your first years subscription, there's been talk of legal proceedings and attempts to silence discussion of the issue.

As I stated, I've had no contact with this company, but from what I've read I'll not be inclined to take out a subscription because of the stance they took.

My 2p.

 

[bushtuckerman]

if this were an entirely open discussion would there not be nothing to stir?

 

[bothyman]

the thing is, the delete key can be a bit of a smokescreen, not to scaremonger or anything...

If people looked in their cookie file I think some may get a shock.
I just ran mine through Adware and binned a load.
Sometimes I just bin the whole file and start again its surprising how fast it can fill up.

MickT

 

[tomtom]

come on folk this thread is getting a bit handbaggy.. unsolicited email are iligal! Those people who recieved smap, if that is what it is, are perfectly within their right to be angy about it and weather you agree with that or not argueing about it is just going to take this thread down hill and get it locked.. i suggest everyone CHILL OUT which ever side of the matter you on!

 

[scanker]

AFAIK cookies can't be shared between sites though.

 

[bushtuckerman]

And adaware removes but the half of it, it is necessary to have a selection of antispyware programs installed if you want to delete a large amount of it, rarely all though.

 

[spoony]

did the guy from the mag post a response explaining his side of things on THIS forum yes or no.

 

[scanker]

*scouse accent* eh eh eh calm down.

In answer to your question, I haven't a clue.

You didn't phrase it very nicely though.

I still haven't a clue.

 

[ESpy]

i could say what I THINK the real issue is but i wont.

Feel free. Take it to PM if you prefer. Naturally, since I've been at the core of this I'm inclined to feel that you're probably aiming your comments in my direction; fair enough.

I don't do ulterior motives. I don't do sub-text. I don't play politics (nasty suspicion that if I tried I'd be very bad at it). I do do ethics, however.

And I do go gunning for spammers & phishers on a regular basis. About the actual product, I really couldn't care less.

 

[spoony]

Feel free. Take it to PM if you prefer. Naturally, since I've been at the core of this I'm inclined to feel that you're probably aiming your comments in my direction; fair enough.

I don't do ulterior motives. I don't do sub-text. I don't play politics (nasty suspicion that if I tried I'd be very bad at it). I do do ethics, however.

And I do go gunning for spammers & phishers on a regular basis. About the actual product, I really couldn't care less.

nope nothing aimed at you or anyone else, just wanted to know where the guy from the mags response is??? 2 sides to every story thats all and so far i see only one.

Simon his rep and the mag have all been condemed and i havent seen anything that proves it was him.

 

[Phil562]

did the guy from the mag post a response explaining his side of things on THIS forum yes or no.

Spoony, yes there was a response, however it was removed.